|
RNZAF jets sold!!
Tis election year and the Nats said, aside from Nuke ships here before lunch, that the RNZAF jets would be back in the skies. Not now as Labour's just sold'em! To whom though??
@ The government says it has done a deal on our Air Force fighter jet fleets. It has been trying to sell the 34 planes for about four years, and yesterday Defence Minister Mark Burton confirmed a heads of agreement had been signed. Mark Burton says the price being offered for the Skyhawk and Aermacchi trainer fleets is upwards of $100 million dollars. He could not go into details, but says it is a fair price and the return will be satisfactory. He says while the government would have liked to bring the deal to a conclusion sooner, he is pleased with the outcome. Mark Burton says the proposal will go to Cabinet tomorrow as a late paper for consideration. He says it is satisfying to have the matter dealt with, and from an Air Force point of view the proceeds will be a welcome addition to the coffers. Mark Burton doubts this development will hold any sway at the polling booths. He hopes to be able to reveal the final details later in the week. :sad: |
"Jets"?? You mean Electric Rats and Hoovers...:p
|
Electric Rat? Hoover?
The A4 Skyhawk is an awesome machine. I'd love to have a fly of one. |
$100 Mill for 34 clapped out Skyhawks and Macchis? Average of $3mill/ airframe???
Who's the buyer? I have a coat-hanger shaped bridge they might be interested in.... |
You sure they are getting money and not palm oil? :ok:
|
Maybe $1M in cash payments over 25 years and $99M in trade concessions and 'promises' over the same time period amounting to a grand total of about $1M in today's money. What for? airframes, engines, spares, jigs, tools, weapons, support vehicles, instrumentation, test equipment, chocks, etc., all delivered to buyer's location at seller's expense. The still flyable A4s might be useful for target practice.
Cynical? You betcha! |
Come now, that is a primo strike wing you are talking about! Proven technology (well proven to be old and slow), great spares package (all the old bits from the ones they crashed, suitably straightened), and a guarantee (guaranteed to be cannon fodder for anybody with a 172 and a shotgun).
Why oh why didn't we buy the F16s... now there is an aircraft worth having a go in... What they should have done with the Skyhawks is what they used to do with old obsolete types... take the weapons out and park them in kids playgrounds. I spent many happy hours as a kid, crawling through an old TBM Avenger in a park in Rotorua. Might as well get some play value out of them. |
Well if we are keen to know who purchased these aircraft it should be a matter for public record.
Perhaps the opposition leader will insist on some details. |
What they should have done with the Skyhawks is |
Interesting how it was released on a Sunday morning...... anybody trying to hide something??
MOR.. you probably played on the old Matilda tank as well then..? That TBM went to MOTAT I think. |
Non approved kids playground equipment shard edges etc = LAWYERS!
Tin as a lad shot down quite a few Zeros using the P-40s and Corsairs parked on Rukuhia. :{ Did the Te Rahu Avenger get good home? |
I would have thought that with an election looming that the NZ government would be in 'caretaker' mode and not making decisions such as this one?!?!?
|
na helen wants them sold on the quick so shes got another 100 million to bribe the bludgers with (to go with the 500 or so million shes pulled out of thin air in the past month)
|
Sold To ATSI according to stuff.co.nz $155 million and 35mil of that is to get em airworthy again !!
Don't know why they would buy the Macchis, they were only interested in the A4s.... |
CT7
Yes I have photos of mself commanding both the tank and the TBM (as well as doing a little wing-walking on the TBM). Tin is right about lawyers... sadly. |
NZDP: No mention of ASTI in Stuff that I could see, all news outlets are reporting what the government has said, namely that all the aircraft have been sold to Tactical Air Services.
Who are they ? |
another piss-poor decision by the Nats.......as usual,lets pass the buck and make everybody else responsible for our pacific duties...bloody wankers.... what will it take to make our govt realise that in this "global" world that we have to front up occasionally and do our part...not asking a lot really:*
|
What's it got to do with the Nats exactly...???
Hasn't news of the last two elections reached Porirua yet...??? Or can't you tell the difference between red and blue? ;) |
Half Truths
This is from Mark Burton's, (the Minister of Defence) press release page. http://labour.org.nz/labour_team/mps...lus/index.html
Were they ever involved in active service? No Why did the Government decide they were no longer required? The Government Defence Statement of 2001 called for a “refocused and updated Air Force”: "The recently completed review of the options for an air combat capability confirmed the finding of the 1998 Air Combat Review chaired by Sir Wilson Whineray that the air combat force equipped with the A-4 Skyhawk in its current state would be a marginal asset to any multinational coalition, and its operational utility will continue to decline. Retaining a force that has never been, and is unlikely ever to be, used would require in excess of one billion dollars in capital expenditure and increases in the NZDF's operating baseline over the next 10 years in the region of $1.2 billion. That is unsustainable” – the Government Defence Statement 2001 Firstly, separate the selling of the Skyhawk from the overall disbandment of the Air Combat Force. I partially agree that the A-4 was no longer a modern front line fighter/attack aircraft, but it was effective when compared to regional threats - in the short term. Getting rid of the Skyhawks is/was not the big issue, but it was an easy way out. Here's what the Whineray review said about the requirement for an Air Combat Force: The Whineray Review in 1998 concluded that the air combat capability had high policy value in protecting and promoting New Zealand’s local, regional and global security interests. It was considered to be fundamental to demonstrate that New Zealand is serious about its own defence, and to send a clear message about our commitment to broader security. http://www.executive.govt.nz/f16/rev...ecommendations Here's what the NZ Ministry of Defence had to say in conclusion in 2001: Retaining a reduced air combat capability would balance the strategic and foreign policy risks of eliminating the capability with the financial risks of maintaining air combat as part of the NZDF structure. Elimination of the air combat force entirely carries strategic, foreign policy and military operational risks. |
gsf:
NZDP: No mention of ASTI in Stuff that I could see, all news outlets are reporting what the government has said, namely that all the aircraft have been sold to Tactical Air Services. http://www.atsifightertraining.com/tactical.html |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 05:02. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.